Memeorandum

July 22, 2009

Because It's Not Cheney And It's Not Evil Oil Executives

Andrew Malcolm of the LA Times notes that Obama and Biden are having the same sort of secret meetings that gave proper progressives fits when it was Dick Cheney meeting with oil company execs. But this time it is health care oriented, so no worries from the usual howlers on the left. [But the day was young! See the Update.]

The still sort-of newBarack ObamaDemocratic
administration has again adopted yet another policy straight out of the
administration of his much-criticized Republican predecessor George W. Bush.

Obama
administration officials have rejected a watchdog group's request for a
list of healthcare industry executives who've been meeting secretly in
the White House with Obama staffers to discuss pending healthcare
changes being drafted there and in Congress.

According to the
Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, which is
suspicious of the influence of health industry lobbyists and company
officers, it received a letter from the Secret Service citing an Obama
Justice Dept. directive and denying access to visitor logs under the
"presidential communications privilege."

Sound familiar?

No, We the People still don't get to watch the sausage being made. I hope people weren't seriously expecting change.

Comments

A few years ago I had an incident as I was hurrying to leave my home to go see my Dad who was very ill. I was tossing items in my purse and unknowingly hit the silent alarm button on the key chain provided by my alarm company. The alarm sounded suddenly and I keyed in the code to shut it off. No one called from the alarm company which is their usual practice, so I thought it was a fluke and made a mental note to contact them about it when I returned.

As I went to pull out of the driveway, I noticed several police cars on the street and police officers going door to door. I approached one officer, asked if they were responding to an alarm and told him that my alarm had sounded for no reason. He asked for my name and address, and for some identification. After I gave him my driver's license, he asked if the officers could search my house to make sure it was secure. I said fine. I was so embarrassed, apologized profusely for the inconvenience and thanked them.

I suppose Mr. Gates would dismiss my experience because I'm a white female. Nonetheless, I believe that he could have avoided any problems by just cooperating with the police.

BTW: I later learned how I had caused the alarm to go off. Needless to say, the key chain is no longer stored in the bottom of my purse. Lesson learned.

This has got to be one of the biggest nonsense statements I've ever read:

The president said he understands the sergeant who arrested Gates is an "outstanding police officer." But he added that with all that's going on in the country with health care and the economy and the wars abroad, "it doesn't make sense to arrest a guy in his own home if he's not causing a serious disturbance."

So, according to the president, given all that's going on right now we should just throw all police department standard protocalls (which exist to ensure maximum safty for police officers) out the window until things in DC and the Middle East settle down.

ya know Ranger, I'm thinkin' that with all the expenses I'm incurring with kids in college and high taxes and the economy so bad and all, I should focus on what's important and rethink payin' the taxes.

" But he(Obama) added that with all that's going on in the country with health care and the economy and the wars abroad, "it doesn't make sense to arrest a guy in his own home if he's not causing a serious disturbance."

Well the criminal classes have got to be given a chance to recoup.They voted for him.

Hmm - Clarice, bad, royf, Captain Hate - I'm most certainly not a Moby, an axelturfer, or a resident of a sewer sludge pit. On the contrary, I am a fan of JOM, ever since I found this sanctuary of reason, and that is truly what I think about it, during Plamegate. But I have always hesitated to join in the discussion...

I couldn't stand listening to 0bama's press conference anymore than many of you. I didn't know he'd commented on the Gates case until I read about it here. So now 0's distracting us from health care. Well, I'm staunchly opposed to the whole health care bill and I've even written my reps about it.

But I still think the police treated Gates badly. Why are some of you JOMers piling on Gates? And there was a racial (or maybe it was gender) component from the beginning when a neighbor (was it really a neighbor?) made the 911 call. I can't help but put myself in his shoes. If I was tired and feeling harrassed and vulnerable, my only means of resistance to injustice would be to yell, helplessly. So what if Gates "lost it", embarrassed himself, bellowed at the policeman, he wasn't committing any crime, and the police had all the power on their side. Sheesh, and one of them was an expert on racial profiling? They could afford to leave the poor man alone. Why didn't they?

I find it disturbing that so many commentors seem to think that Gates deserved to be arrested. Was it "for his own good"? To teach him a "lesson"?

It's kind of ironic, because that's the philosophy that Obama and his acolytes are trying to force on the rest of us.

I'm disappointed and kind of surprised that some of my favorite JOMers are taking such delight in dumping on Gates. 0Bama, by all means, but Gates does not deserve your derision.

Don't go back into hiding - you have a point of view worth defending - nothing will score you more points around here.

Here is my take on it: The police acted appropriately. They asked for Gate's ID and he refuse to give it. He finally turned over a Harvard ID but no license. He became abusive. That was his mistake simply because these cops were protecting HIS property. His error was unleashed hubris.

Obama's error was getting involved on the side of his friend, without having all the facts. Something it appears he does regularly.

I don't think Gates "deserved to be arrested" but I also don't think he was arrested because he is black. He was arrested because he was a jerk. They dropped the charges. He should have walked away recognizing that a whole lot of what went down, was his fault. The fact that he didn't (and this was all over the Boston papers long before the presidebt mentioned it) was what got him in trouble - at least with me.

So what if Gates "lost it", embarrassed himself, bellowed at the policeman, he wasn't committing any crime, and the police had all the power on their side.

Mom,

My understanding from the police report was that Gates started yelling immediately after the officer asked him to identify himself. Gates refused to give his identity or his driver's license in response to the officer's request, and accused the officer of racism from the very beginning of the conversation (if you can call it that). Sorry, but if you mess with the police you are always taking a risk.

Have you read the police report? Granted it is one side of the story, but I am curious to know. It sounds as if you are assuming that this was a friendly dialogue that went bad. That is not what the report says.

Keep in mind also that there was a burglary attempt on Gates' house while he was away. Sure, Gates may not have known that, but his ignorance is not the fault of the officer.

Simply put: I might yell at my husband after a long trip where I'm frazzled and can't get in my front door. But I'm damn sure not going to yell at a cop. Gates played with fire and got burned. He should have been grateful someone was looking after his house at all.

And there was a racial (or maybe it was gender) component from the beginning when a neighbor (was it really a neighbor?) made the 911 call.

Operator: 911.

Caller: I'm calling to report a break-in at XXX.

Operator: Can you describe who you see breaking in?

Caller: I could, but I'm not going to.

Operator: ...

Caller: And I urge you not to leap to a conclusion about the suspect's race or gender based on my refusal to provide that information.

Operator: What if I take your pointed refusal as a kind of passive-aggressive way to communicate the information without saying it outright? Kind of a "don't think of an elephant" sort of thing.

Caller: No, that wouldn't be right (morally, I mean; I have nothing to say about whether the factual conclusion would happen to be correct).

Operator: Could I take your stance to be an attempt to goad me into reporting the suspects as members of a race -

Caller: -or gender-

Operator: -or gender that is stereotypically-

Caller: -and unfairly-

Operator: -right, unfairly linked with crime, while the suspect is in fact a member of a race or gender that is not so linked? Such that the eventual revelation of the truth leads me to introspection about my preconceptions about what it means to be a criminal in America.

Caller: I note the delicious irony that that was your second response not your first, which is tantamount to an admission that you do harbor such prejudices, but no, that's not it either.

Operator: What exactly do you want from me?

Caller: I just want you to send the police to the scene without giving them any information about who or what they may see when they arrive. I want them to keep an open mind about the whole thing.

My comment was out of line and I apologize, I was simply out of line. Although I don't agree with you view on this situation.

The policeman was assigned to answer the call of a possible break-in, he wasn't cruising around looking for black men to harass. The neighborhood had several previous such break-ins including this professors house. Why a person wouldn't at least be civil about that once it was explained is beyond me. And the officer would have been derelict in his duties if he had not required identification.

There are apparently audio tapes of the situation so I guess we will find out who was the ass. But I am sorry I got personal in one of my previous post, I get so tired of trolls who come here and other places with talking points. It is obvious now to me that I mistook you for one of them.